By Dr. T Sayles (The Professor)
What is America’s fascination with guns? A recent proposed amendment to the Pentagon’s budget sought to allow concealed weapons permits reciprocity across all states. If you were authorized to carry a concealed weapon in Montana, a state so wide open and empty that some sections of the interstate DO NOT have a speed limit, you would be able to carry in New York. This idea in itself is crazy, but it’s not alone.
The NRA wants to stop to a bill before Congress that denies anyone on the federal no-fly list, right to carry a gun. Echoes of Colin Ferguson, the LIRR shooter, the Virginia Tech shooting, and Columbine massacre, ring throughout this bill. The NRA says that this is a violation of due process because the people on the list are just suspected terrorists. They also claim that the list is not 100% accurate, with approximately 20% of the names erroneous. Forget that the other 80% are likely terrorists, we have to enable them because denying them may be a violation of citizens’ Second Amendment rights.
The second amendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Back in the day, the colonists formed the Continental Army but they were still outnumbered by the British. They needed every person they could get to stand up against the government.
They needed everyone; the farmers, the preachers, the plumbers…even Joe…to stand up and “hold the line.” But the colonists were not crazy. They didn’t just want anyone to have guns, which is why they stated, “well regulated militia.” Stepping into the present, do you really think giving ordinary folks rifles would allow them the ability to defend against the most powerful military in the world?
People will say, “What if someone breaks into my house and tries to harm me and my children? Well even the NRA believes in gun safety. They say you should keep your weapon unloaded and locked in a safe place with the ammunition separate from the weapon. What good is that if someone breaks into your home to harm you or your children? What are you going to do, say, “Wait right here let me go get my gun?
I spent 17 years in the military, firing weapons from a 9 mm handgun to a Howitzer. I know that you need your weapon at your side to be prepared to use it. This would mean that everyone would have to carry a weapon in their home, on their person at all times to be effective. That’s neither practical nor safe.
What were you really planning on doing with the gun? Don’t say, “Well, I would shoot a weapon out of the person’s hand.” That’s for Hollywood movies. You train to shoot center mass. That is a good shoot. It’s also a kill shot, and that’s what weapons are designed for. Guns are for killing. Ask any new military recruit what we learn early in basic training. “Kill, kill, kill with cold blue steel!” And every soldier knows the answer to this question. 
“What makes the grass grow green?” “Blood drill sergeant! Blood makes the grass grow green!” You don’t train with weapons “to defend” you train to kill.
That’s what we need to talk about. We get guns so we can kill people. That is the truth. But will we be truly honest with ourselves? No one wants to hear “I want a gun so I can kill anyone coming into my home,” so we say to “defend myself” instead of “kill”. Guns are for killing, and anyone who has actually killed someone will tell you that there is nothing positive about it. No high fives at the bar followed by, “yeah you got that summa ma bitch with two shots. You da man!” You will hear tales of nightmares, flashbacks and guilt.
I have never met anyone who killed someone and who wasn’t changed for the rest of their lives. I’ve even heard, “Well, an armed society is a polite society. You won’t do something stupid if you know the other guy may have a gun.” Tell that to the Bloods and Crips, all of whom put down their weapons because the other side had guns, right?
The rule of law is being manipulated to promote and increasingly lawless society. On one hand we have lobbyists attempting to circumvent safeguards to the general safety of our citizen. On the other, we have national organizations encouraging citizens to continue irresponsibility and nonsensical behavior; harmless for trained and orderly communities, but raining death and destruction upon high population centers with citizens that lack training, firearm education, and basic breathing room. Make no mistake. If we start being honest and acknowledge the true purpose of gun ownership, perhaps people will stop being so gun-happy. Surely confronting your willingness to kill another is anathema to a citizen of a “Christian” nation…right?
The opinions expressed in the above editorial do not necessarily express those of Planet Ill, its representatives or it’s assigns.
Follow Us on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/planetill
Join Us on the Planet Ill Facebook Group for more discussion
Suggesting that a Constitutionally protected right be abridged with neither due process nor means of appeal is inherently unreasonable and tyrannical. Your stated position offers no actual fact; you are merely relying upon conjecture, but this does not constitute a demonstration of a rational position.
Dimensio, Would you care to respond in an editorial of your own? We are not partisan here on the Planet. By the way, I’m only the poster not the actual author.
“Dimensio, Would you care to respond in an editorial of your own?”
An editorial should not be required to rebut a proposal to deny rights to citizens who have committed no crime with neither due process nor means of appeal; such a proposal should be so abhorrent to a significant majority of the populace so as to not be considered at all.
I don’t disagree with you. Hence the disclaimer. The real problem is that the value of liberty is getting rapidly eroded by the lust for “security”. You would THINK that a majority would be apalled. You can watch your television or listen to your radio and realize that they aren’t. That’s when the American experiment gets in big trouble.
Thanks for reading. peace
The constitutional right to “bear arms” is directly connected to having a “well regulated militia.” I do not believe there is a consitutional right to bear arms simply for the purpose of bearing arms therefore denying individuals would not be unconsituional, unreasonable or tyrannical. The “fact” is that you cannot carry weapons in many states and jurisdictions so the notion of this limitation is hardly based upon conjecture. I only hope that there is equal outrage when the issue of people locked away at Gitmo is addressed. Some have been citizens who have been denied rights without due process, means of appeal or even presenting any evidence against them. They have been denied their very freedom, not just a gun. It is not just a proposal but a reality and the majority does not seem to be apalled.
I wasn’t in the room when the framers of the constitution were figuring out the 2nd Amendment, but I’m gonna take a wild guess and say that “well regulated militia” meant to them what we call the national guard today. I’m thinking state & local police forces also fall into what they were thinking about.
The average citizen just walking around with a gun on their hip or locked away in their houses with the ammunition in a separate safe place is a distortion of what the law was drafted for in the first place – to protect American land from foreign invaders – not protecting individuals from each other.
I get it… I understand why someone would want a gun, but far too many people are killed each year by mistake or by HOT HEAD.
Let’s keep ’em honest and say what gun enthusiasts really want to keep their guns for: the fabled race war. I’ve heard about it for years, one day something is gonna trigger a terrible war between American citizens of different colors… and those who cling to the 2nd Amendment, really want guns to protect themselves because they see that they are a quickly shrinking majority in this country.